Silencing JFK theorists only worsens distrust

This commentary is by Kris Millegan, whose TrineDay publishing house carries many current titles related to the JFK assassination. Some of those will be on display and for sale at the COPA conference in Dallas.

Guest Viewpoint
Silencing JFK theorists only worsens distrust
By Kris Millegan
Published: 12:00 a.m., Nov. 10
http://www.registerguard.com/rg/opinion/30702268-78/oswald-conspiracy-mosk-commission-fbi.html.csp

With all due respect to Richard Mosk’s Nov. 3 Commentary essay, “Fifty Years Later and Still No Conspiracy,” [http://billingsgazette.com/news/opinion/guest/guest-opinion-still-no-proof-of-jfk-conspiracy-after-years/article_31ecf8f4-ba27-57ae-bde0-d06a705a6be4.html]in 1979 the official report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations stated: “The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy.”

Contrary to Mosk’s suspicions that “most Americans have come to accept the conclusions of the Warren Commission,” in a 2013 Associated Press survey 25 percent said Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, and 75 percent said there was a conspiracy. An avalanche of credible evidence over the past five decades supports the view that a coup d’ etat happened in November of 1963, with incalculable consequences for our country and the world. Just as lies are told so wars may be fought, many lies have been told to cover up the violent removal of a head of state.

I was in Mrs. Helser’s ninth-grade Spanish class when the news came over the intercom. While my fellow students sat stunned, I was called to the school office where my boss from The Oregonian told me to get on the streets and sell newspapers. The only other time this happened in my six-year career as a paperboy was two days later, when Oswald was conveniently murdered. It was a traumatic period, to say the least.

Those who deny any conspiracy continually trot out the same old story. No matter what evidence emerges, it is dismissed as some kind of opportunism or irrational mental condition. People who write books challenging the official line have no grandiose hopes of getting rich. Bestsellers are for those who keep Oswald front and center, like Vincent Bugliosi and Gerald Posner. For we who beg to differ, the hope of being reviewed by major national media outlets is like waiting for Godot. Nevertheless, you can’t fool most of the people this time.

Mosk also writes, “The promotion of false conspiracy theories is not harmless.” Neither is the promotion of half-truths, myths and cover-ups. Mosk’s blind acceptance of the largely disproven Warren Report is the real threat to our republic (which appears to be acting more like an empire these days).

Our small publishing company experiences first-hand the firewall behind which our mass media outlets cower. They seem to believe that by ignoring the ideas, research and conclusions that many of us bring to the table, they are saving their credibility, along with that of our government institutions. The reality is exactly the opposite: By ignoring the viewpoints and concerns of a majority of citizens, the media have only added to the alienation and miasma infecting our social order. The media foster the very problem they pretend to deplore.

Mosk cites “more than 25,000 interviews” conducted by the commission. While one admires the quantity of its efforts, it is tragic that the commission failed to interview a handful of people who might have given a different story, and ignored or failed to follow up on others.

Of course, some of those who wished to testify died in various ways. It didn’t really matter. The investigation homed in exclusively on Oswald. The drumbeat of Oswald’s guilt has unfortunately obscured greater questions: who, why and what now?

Retired FBI and Secret Service agents, some of whom were in Dallas that day, believe there was a murder conspiracy. People who were in Dealey Plaza that day believe it. This does not constitute proof, but to utterly dismiss the possibility when good men disagree sounds suspiciously like blind patriotism, the scourge of a democratic republic.

Mosk’s missive may hit its mark with some, but for anyone who actually looks into the subject, there are multiple verifiable refutations of the Warren Commission’s findings and its methodology. The murder of Kennedy constituted the violent overthrow of an elected official, using sophisticated intelligence protocols. Professionals then covered up the killing.

Barely four hours after the assassination J. Edgar “There is no Mafia” Hoover declared to his agents in Dallas in an FBI memo that the Dallas police “Very probably had Kennedy’s killer in custody.” The next day, FBI agent James Hosty destroyed all information he had concerning Oswald. Then on Nov. 24, Hoover called the White House and left a message for the new President Johnson: “I am most concerned about having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin.” Four days after the assassination Hoover declared in a FBI memo: “Wrap up the investigation: seems to me we have the basic facts now.”

Before he was silenced, Oswald declared he was just a patsy, which a dictionary defines as “A person who is easily taken advantage of, especially by being cheated or blamed for something.” Another patsy in this long-festering mess is us: We, the people.

Kris Millegan is publisher of TrineDay Press in Walterville. Kelly Ray, an editor at TrineDay, assisted with the preparation of this essay.